User Reviews

Dear People that made Sharktopus ,

We think that you paid 10 dollars on the whole movie. Next movie put at least 30 dollars. This movie needs a lot of work, more drama and make more things look real .Everything looks fake , and if you remake this movie don't make so many girls die and don't make Santos die. I think when the actors read this they thought it was cool. But when they were acting, in it in their heads they probably thought why are we doing this this is so stupid. My thought was every 10 minutes in the beginning someone dies in the middle every 5 minutes someone dies then in the end every 3 minutes someone dies.Nathenal gets cut in the leg but someone else gets cut too and dies while he doesn't?! Sincerely, Alexis,Jocelyn, and Sophia

Now I love a good creature flick, but my god this film took the award as one of the most awful pieces of crap I've ever watched. The acting was awful, the stirrings was predictable, the continuity was a complete hash and the cgi must have been done by a blind child. The only good thing about the film was it didn't last longer. A word of advice to any one wishing to watch this would be to avoid it like the plague. **SPOILER** Here's a quick list of faults When it comes time for people to be eaten they stand in either the same spot flailing their arms like mental patients or else moving towards the sharktopus's mouth. None of the actors seemed to know where the CGI was going to be happening at. The camera work must have been done by a one armed epileptic. To sum up, an awful, awful, AWFUL movie!!

I knew that I shouldn't expect much, but this movie really is a disaster. Here are a few points: - the shark looks like in some Tom and Jerry cartoons, only with tentacles.

• the shark could rip a boat to pieces, but some guys go underwater with some sticks to 'capture' it. guess what happens? - I always thought what would be the equivalent of a shark on solid land. Looks like this shark can literally walk on land using its tentacles. This is really stupid.

• the people in the movie are really stupid. They see that something weird is in the water and they stay still, or they 'look close' until the shark eats them.

• they go after the shark with a small boat, smaller than the shark itself - the shark stands outside the surface of the ocean, in a few instances, using its tentacles, like its some kind of fly.

I like shark movies, but this was a waste of time. Watch it only if you want to count the bad parts in the script and acting.

After about 15 minutes that's all I could think of - WHY?

There is no logical reason to actually make a movie like this. It's not even in the "so bad it's funny" pile, it's just plain stupid and it's another movie in a growing line of movies that's ruined by bad CGI.

A Scientist, Eric Roberts, is commissioned by the navy, along with his daughter, to develop a biological weapon to combat drug runners, pirates, slavers and anything else that the military might need it for, so naturally they set about splicing together a shark & an Octopus and manage to create the perfect killing machine apparently.

As usual during a "routine" test of this creatures abilities, the device which controls this aberration of nature, is clipped by a motor boat propeller and gets damaged. The device is little more than a transmitter fitted with flimsy belt strapped around the creature, which they call S11, and once the scientists are no longer in control, the creature pulls it off, discards it and then sets about doing what every twisted freak of nature does best, travels to Mexico to feast on Chicas, boats, bungee jumpers and anything else you can wrap a CGI tentacle around.

The thing that makes this movie just plain bad is that it actually tries to pull itself off as being a serious movie. Eric Roberts was either incredibly drunk when he agreed to do this or just plain desperate as he looks bored and bemused through the whole stupid mess. At a stretch if there was anything in this flick that could save it, it would be some of the scientific dialogue and that for once the action does not take place in the U.S but in Mexico instead, however even with that, this is a total disaster.

Even if it were possible to splice together the genes of 2 totally different species like this, I don't get why it suddenly feels the need to come up on land to look for food. I've never seen an octopus do this except to get to the next rock pool before it dries out and what's it breathing? The CGI effects are terrible as is the faux reaction that needs to be done by the "actors" whenever this thing is supposed to grab them. I've also never known any shark that was impervious to a machine gun.

A particularly brainless scene involves S11 coming ashore near some cultural dancers. It perches itself up on some nearby columns yet no one saw it come out of the water? One retard in the audience actually asks "is that part of the show" before all hell breaks loose.

Another equally dismal scene has this bikini clad girl treasure hunting along the shoreline with a metal detector. She finds a gold coin but is pulled to her death by large tentacles. The whole scene is watched by an old man, who never warns her, never cries out for help, doesn't even appear shocked by what he just witnessed, he simply picks up the gold coin and walks off!

And the movie goes on like this. The death scenes are way too predictable and clumsy, the effects are cheap, there's no acting at all and the fact that it exists as a movie is an abomination. Movie makers were doing stuff like this better back in the 1950's with "It Came from Beneath the Sea", with less of a budget and when you needed a working brain to create special effects. Even Jaws was made of rubber & fibreglass and it looked more real.

Save your time, your sanity and your money and avoid this. If you must see this, get a cheap copy or borrow one and then rid the earth of it.

This wasn't a "B" movie, it was more like a "X, Y or Z" movie. This was 2 hours of my life I can never be able to get back. The monster it self looked good, but I was amazed that it could be shot hundreds of times and never bleed. Did it have bullet proof skin??? Another thing was its size, in one scene it would look to be 20-30 foot long and in the next scene it would look like it was 60-80 foot long. Then there's the actors.....The reporter looked more like she should have been working a corner instead of being on camera. I had to laugh at the camera mans tattoos....at the beginning of the movie they were pitch black, but by the end of the movie they were barely visible. The final scene I had to laugh at...the hero, is in the middle of the water on top of a rock when they blow up the monster, it's only a few feet away from him when it blows, so he gets covered in blood. He would have to had to go through the water to get out and back on land, but the next scene he's standing at a pavilion completely covered in blood, smiling as he puts his arm around his girl and walks away, like the blood is not even there. Any normal person would have washed it off....HELLO! I realize this was suppose to be campy (or at least I hope it was) but it was bad....cheesy bad, but that's just my opinion.

Sharktopus starts as the US military & private genetic engineering scientist Nathan Sands (Eric Roberts) carry out a test on a project known as S-11, a half Shark half Octopus hybrid that has been genetically created as the ultimate weapon of the future. The fearsome Shark Octopus creature is controlled through electronic impulses but during the test the little electronic box attached to it's body is damaged & Sharktopus is free to do whatever it wants including swimming down to Puerto Vallarta in Mexico & start eating swimmers, tourists, sunbathers & just about anyone it fancies. The US military don't want any bad publicity so make Sands & his team track the beast down & try to capture it, two news reporters are also after the Sharktopus monster after they sense a big story. Can the tentacled sea creature be defeated?

Directed by Declan O'Brien this is yet more Sy-Fy Channel creature feature crap, to be honest Sharktopus feels like exactly the same film as the Sy-Fy Channel's previous Dinoshark (2010) which was also produced by Roger Corman, featured some monster eating tourists in Puerto Vallarta & was basically crap. In fact the only real significant difference between Sharktopus & Dinoshark are the two main monsters, personally I think Sharktopus is the better & funner creature though so that in itself probably just about makes Sharktopus the better film of the two although that's by no means any sort of recommendation. As one would expect the character's are broad clichés like the big game hunter brought in to track the beast, the nerdy scientist love interest, the evil genetic scientist who just wants to protect the creature, the sinister military yet again trying to create the ultimate weapon & even an ambitious reporter who will stop at nothing to get the big story. There really isn't anything we haven't seen here before, it's all clichéd stuff with every scene, every plot device & every character taken from some other film. I suppose Sharktopus has one or two decent moments, once Sharktopus uses it's tentacles to walk on land the sheer lunacy of such a concept & such scenes have a certain dumb fun about them even if they look daft. At only 86 minutes long at least it moves at a decent pace & is rarely boring, the only problem is it's rarely any good either with boring one-dimensional character's, a silly monster & a throughly predictable & clichéd plot.

The idea of a Shark Octopus hybrid is cool, if Sharktopus had a decent budget then I'm sure we could have been looking at a pretty cool monster but with predictably terrible CGI computer effects & poorly shot & edited attack scenes it's impossible to stop laughing. There's a bit of quick gore, someone gets their head ripped off, someone gets their throat slashed, there's lots of bloody water & the odd Shark sized bite. The attack scenes are a poor mixture of actor's splashing around, bad CGI & quick editing, the best attack is probably when a woman bungee jumps off a bride & the Sharktopus jumps out of the water & eats her in mid air. The whole physics of Sharktopus & the way it moves is wrong, the way it swims & can just stop dead in the water or float on the surface or do whatever it wants. Sharktopus also seems to randomly change size between scenes too, first being big enough to destroy a yacht & then only as big a normal man & anything between.

Probably shot on a low budget in the same locations as Dinoshark probably at the same time Shartopus looks alright I suppose, forget the bad CGI this has reasonable production values. The acting isn't great but again much better than in Dinoshark, veteran actor Eric Roberts probably needed the money or fancied a free holiday.

Sharktopus sounds like fun & I suppose it has a few moments that might be classed as such but overall it's another standard, clichéd, predictable & routine creature feature from the Sy-Fy Channel. It has one of the better monsters but really nothing else to recommend it.

Going in, this had a lot going for it. Very nice locations in Mexico, lots of nice looking young people dressed for the beach. The plot was predictable, but that's not really a liability.

Then we see the monster. It looks like a big helium balloon from the Macy's parade, and it is CHEAP. And we see long shots of it in the bright sunshine that the Mexican coast provides so plentifully. We can't be scared of it because it's too fake to scare anyone over the age of three.

Roger Corman was just flat asleep at the wheel producing this one. Look back at the 1950's when he'd direct movies like THE DAY THE WORLD ENDED and Paul Blaisdell would make monsters out of whatever scraps he found lying around the studio. The monsters would be photographed at night, in shadows, in smoke, by flickering firelight, any way to keep us from getting too good a look at them. Here, the SFX people seem to be saying, This is a stupid idea, we didn't want to work on it, so there.

One thing about it is really scary, though. We see Eric Roberts play the lead in another film totally unworthy of him. Mr. Oscar nominee, Golden Globe nominee, Mr. Flavor of the Month in the 1980's winds up in crap like this just so he can get top billing? Now he's going back and forth between a strong supporting role in THE DARK KNIGHT to grade z projects. In 2010 he's credited for nineteen roles in films and TV shows.

Pathetic. Avoid this unless you just like seeing good actors make fools of themselves.